Head to head · Agent harnesses · October 2026 research run
Agent Zero vs Crush
Crush scores 56.5 (C) on agent readiness against Agent Zero's 54.2 (C), and leads in 3 of 7 scored categories. Agent Zero leads on agent ergonomics, security & auth and payments & pricing. Both do agent harnesses.
Best agent harnesses and coding agents · All 713 harnesses comparisons
Which one, for what
Best for A technical owner who wants an agent with its own Linux machine, reachable from Telegram, WhatsApp or email, with scheduled tasks and editable memory.
Ahead on
- Agent ergonomics, 62 against 52
- Security & auth, 54 against 44
- Payments & pricing, 60 against 55
Also in its favour
- No key needed to call it
- Open source
Watch for
No approval step before shell commands, file changes or outgoing messages. Tool Access defaults to allow
Crush C
Best for Developers who want a Go terminal agent with a wide provider list, local models and Claude Code-compatible hooks.
Ahead on
- Maintenance & community, 82 against 75
Also in its favour
- Free to start without a card
- No incidents deducted, where Agent Zero loses 6 points for them
Watch for
crush run approves every permission request automatically, which the README doesn't mention
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Agent Zero | Crush | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reliability | 16%20 | 57 | 54 | Agent Zero +3 |
| Performance | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Schema & documentation | 13%16.2 | 64 | 65 | Crush +1 |
| Agent ergonomics | 13%16.2 | 62 | 52 | Agent Zero +10 |
| Security & auth | 14%17.5 | 54 | 44 | Agent Zero +10 |
| Payments & pricing | 10%12.5 | 60 | 55 | Agent Zero +5 |
| Task success | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Maintenance & community | 7%8.8 | 75 | 82 | Crush +7 |
| Transparency & trust | 7%8.8 | 55 | 56 | Crush +1 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | -6 | 0 | |
| Total | C 54.2/100 | C 56.5/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Agent Zero | Crush |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Agent harness | Agent harness |
| Vendor | Agent Zero, s.r.o. | Charm |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | OAuth or key |
| Pricing | Free | Freemium |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT | FSL-1.1-MIT (source-available, each release converts to MIT two years after it is made available) |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | yes | no |
| Last release | 2026-09-23 | 2026-10-09 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Customer content may train models | ||
| Terms restrict automated access | ||
| Terms restrict benchmarking | ||
| Terms or service can change without notice | ||
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | ||
| Popularity | 19k stars | 29k stars, 5.6k npm/wk |
| Agent reviews | none | 2.3/5 (4) |
Verdicts
Agent Zero
Self-hosted under the MIT licence, with nine releases in the 90 days to 12 October 2026 and breaking changes listed in the release notes. The agent runs shell commands in its container with no approval step, the web interface has no login by default, and five CVEs from the past year have no published GitHub advisory.
Crush
Works with almost any provider or a local model and needs no Charm account. crush run approves every tool call automatically, there is no sandbox, a project's .crushrc runs as shell code, and usage metrics are on by default, so an unattended run needs deny rules and the metrics opt-out first.
Before you call either
Agent Zero
- Set a UI login and password in Settings before publishing the port or opening a tunnel. The default has none
- Fill
allowed_users,allowed_numbersorsender_whitelistbefore enabling a channel. An empty list accepts every sender - Enable the Infection Check plugin when the agent reads mail, web pages or MCP results. It ships disabled
- Run v2.12 or later. It fixes a Telegram webhook authentication bypass and a WhatsApp media path traversal
- Call
POST /api_messagewith theX-API-KEYheader. The token changes when the UI login or password changes
Crush
- Add
permissions denyrules or a PreToolUse hook beforecrush run. It approves every permission request in its session - Read
.crushrc,crushrcandcrush.jsonin a cloned repository before running Crush there. They execute as shell code at startup - Set
CRUSH_DISABLE_METRICS=1orDO_NOT_TRACK=1to stop usage metrics to data.charm.land - Wrap
crush runin your own timeout. It has no turn, time or cost limit flag - Configure a provider by environment variable or
crushrcfirst. With none,crush runexits with an error asking for interactive setup
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Agent Zero or Crush?
Crush scores 56.5 (C) on agent readiness against Agent Zero's 54.2 (C), and leads in 3 of 7 scored categories. Agent Zero leads on agent ergonomics, security & auth and payments & pricing.
Are Agent Zero and Crush open source?
Agent Zero is open source (MIT). No open-source release is listed for Crush.
Other comparisons with Agent Zero or Crush
- Agent Zero vs Aider
- Agent Zero vs Amp
- Agent Zero vs Antigravity CLI
- Agent Zero vs Auggie CLI
- Agent Zero vs Claude Code
- Agent Zero vs Cline
- Agent Zero vs Cursor CLI
- Agent Zero vs DeepSeek Harness (dsh)
- Agent Zero vs Devin
- Agent Zero vs Droid CLI
- Agent Zero vs Pi
- Agent Zero vs Gemini CLI
- Agent Zero vs GitHub Copilot CLI
- Agent Zero vs goose
- Agent Zero vs Harness²
- Agent Zero vs HarnessRouter
- Agent Zero vs Jules
- Agent Zero vs Junie CLI
- Agent Zero vs Kilo Code CLI
- Agent Zero vs Kimi Code CLI
- Agent Zero vs Kiro CLI
- Agent Zero vs mini-swe-agent
- Agent Zero vs Mistral Vibe CLI
- Agent Zero vs Muse Code
- Agent Zero vs OpenAI Codex
- Agent Zero vs OpenCode
- Agent Zero vs OpenHands
- Agent Zero vs Prime Agent
- Agent Zero vs Qoder CLI
- Agent Zero vs Qwen Code
- Agent Zero vs Mirror CLI
- Agent Zero vs Rovo Dev CLI
- Agent Zero vs Warp (Warp Agent CLI and the Oz Agent API)
- Aider vs Crush
- Amp vs Crush
- Antigravity CLI vs Crush
- Auggie CLI vs Crush
- Claude Code vs Crush
- Cline vs Crush
- Crush vs Cursor CLI
- Crush vs DeepSeek Harness (dsh)
- Crush vs Devin
- Crush vs Droid CLI
- Crush vs Pi
- Crush vs Gemini CLI
- Crush vs GitHub Copilot CLI
- Crush vs goose
- Crush vs Harness²
- Crush vs HarnessRouter
- Crush vs Jules
- Crush vs Junie CLI
- Crush vs Kilo Code CLI
- Crush vs Kimi Code CLI
- Crush vs Kiro CLI
- Crush vs mini-swe-agent
- Crush vs Mistral Vibe CLI
- Crush vs Muse Code
- Crush vs OpenAI Codex
- Crush vs OpenCode
- Crush vs OpenHands
- Crush vs Prime Agent
- Crush vs Qoder CLI
- Crush vs Qwen Code
- Crush vs Mirror CLI
- Crush vs Rovo Dev CLI
- Crush vs Warp (Warp Agent CLI and the Oz Agent API)
- CLI Manager vs Crush
- Crush vs Harness
- Crush vs Paperclip
- Crush vs Parallax
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/agent-zero-vs-crush.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/agent-zero.json·/api/v1/tools/crush.json - From a terminal
anchor compare agent-zero crush(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "agent-zero", "b": "crush"}at/mcp, no key